You should visit Africa and see humans living in villages in the "most natural, basic state" and I seriously doubt anyone would want to live like that. Doubly so for women, for of course it doesn't come with choice of partner (rape is "default", in the sense of not choosing who you have sex with, violence is not usually involved), nor does it come with hygene supplies. It also comes with violence, in fact, if you're male, you're either going to die from some (easily curable) disease or violently (usually both: you're going to die from disease, specifically gangreen, after a superficial bit of violence. Like a rat bite during a hunt, or simply by getting a cut from a tree). If you're female, you're going to die giving birth to your 7th kid. I think I'd actually prefer the latter. Of your life, you'll spend a third of it with food poisoning (usually due to the water, not so much the food).

As for the loving, it's mostly the physical kind of loving (on the plus side: the women -and men- are physically a lot more attractive than the average westerner, and obviously nobody except one village leader and his "wife" are fat, usually not even them). There is no love in parent-child relations. They're very, very different : kids aren't brought up by their parents, rather they're brought up by their seniors. The 12 year olds take care of the 8 year olds, the 8 year olds of the 6 year olds, and so on. On the plus side: this works pretty well. On the downside: your sleeping accomodations are likely to suck badly until you're at least 8 years old and capable of building a hut.

Somehow this form of living, which is the only true "most natural, basic state" of the human species. Judging from talking to a few of these people, it seems to me it's a total lack of mental state and thought that leads to this form of living.

That's not consistent with what Tolstoy said (or at least what the author says of what Tolstoy said -- I haven't actually read Tolstoy). The author says that Tolstoy "advocates for a return to our most natural, basic state, which is the law of love." [Emphasis added.] Mankind can't return to this state because mankind has never been in this state. We may some day in the future be in this state (I hope so) but we haven't quite gotten there yet. And, I submit, denying this won't help.

Well, I get that. To be as blunt as possible for comprehension - Tolstoy and the like, when they are busy living "the law of love," are actually dissociating themselves from the savage instincts (while identifying with the tender ones), which gives rise to the delusion that their newfound identification is somehow our "most natura, basic state" that other people need to return to.

This is the same old Spiritual nonsense being regurgitated by the so-called secularists. For example, Zen masters talk about (returning to) one's "Original Face" which is the same thing, ultimately. However just because some popular person says something doesn't make it so. As we know that human nature, deep down, is comprised of both the savage (fear, anger) and tender (nurture, desire) instincts - it is simply not possible at the same time for our "most natural, basic state" (that we supposedly had in the golden past and have lost since then) to be exclusively tender (love) in nature unless, of course, one is either smoking something or sitting cross-legged to some dissociative state.

> We may some day in the future be in this state (I hope so)

And I too hope we will figure out a way to live in complete peace and harmony. But denying human nature — as the likes of Gandhi, Tolstoy, Buddha are wont to do — ain't gonna get us there. We can already get a peek at what happens when people deny human nature by observing modern day social politics.

I like your comment because it is a good antidote for people who suffer from a naive and dull sort of adoration for saintly, detached love. But there is also a detachment which comes from embracing and surrendering to human nature. This is the difference between the saint and his admirers.

For the record, Zen Masters were often violent, and they do not seem to have believed in returning to a natural state of peace and love.

"Original face" is a mysterious phrase used by Huineng, an early patriarch, in a story where he's chased by an angry monk and when they stop and talk, the patriarch tells him to suspend all thoughts of right and wrong and then asks him about his "face before you were born." This provokes an insight for the monk.

These masters did talk about being ordinary, ordinary mind, mind that doesn't cling to delusions, mind that's relaxed and in some sense carefree. But they also denounced "mind pacification" and sitting cross-legged.